Transformative learning

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 The introduction to this article provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject.
Please help improve the article with a good introductory style.
All or part of this article may be confusing or unclear.
Please help clarify the article. Suggestions may be on the talk page. (December 2006)

Transformative learning (or transformational learning) is a process of getting beyond gaining factual knowledge alone to instead become changed by what one learns in some meaningful way. It involves questioning assumptions, beliefs and values, and considering multiple points of view, [1] while always seeking to verify reasoning.

There is great debate on what qualifies as “transformative” and whether the process is best understood intellectually, emotionally, spiritually or politically. For instance, transformation can inspire action to change the world, and unfair distribution of resources and power in particular, in order to promote the welfare of all peoples.

Contents

[edit] Meaning structures and meaning schemes

Transformative learning theory came out of Jack Mezirow's earlier theory of perspective transformation[2], which he saw as the same concept as Paulo Freire's "conscientization" and Jürgen Habermas's "emancipatory action" domain of learning.

As Mezirow explains, "Perspective transformation is the process of becoming critically aware of how and why our assumptions have come to constrain the way we perceive, understand, and feel about our world; changing these structures of habitual expectation to make possible a more inclusive, discriminating, and integrating perspective; and, finally, making choices or otherwise acting upon these new understandings."[3]

The theory posits that for learners to change their meaning structures - that is, beliefs, attitudes, and emotional reactions - they must engage in critical reflection on their experiences, which in turn leads to a transformation of perspective.[4]

Meaning structures are frames of reference that are based on a person's cultural and contextual experiences, and which influence how he behaves and interprets events.[5] Meaning structures are made up of meaning schemes. Meaning schemes may change as a person adds to or integrates ideas within an existing scheme and, in fact, this transformation of meaning schemes occurs routinely through learning.

[edit] Perspective transformation

Perspective transformation leading to transformative learning, however, occurs much less frequently. Mezirow believes that it usually results from a disorienting dilemma, which is triggered by a life crisis or major life transition, although it may also result from an accumulation of transformations in meaning schemes over a period of time.[6] Less dramatic predicaments, such as those created by a teacher, also promote transformation. [7]

Meaning schemes are ways people make sense of experiences, deconstruct them, and act upon them in a rational way. [8] Mezirow suggests this happens through a series of phases that begin with the disorienting dilemma and passes through several other phases ending with integration of the new perspective into the person's life.[9]

An important part of transformative learning is for individuals to change their frames of reference by critically reflecting on their assumptions and beliefs and consciously making and implementing plans that bring about new ways of defining their worlds. This process is fundamentally rational and analytical.[10][11]

[edit] Other perspectives

A number of critical responses to Mezirow's theory of transformative learning have emerged over the years.[12] One criticism of Mezirow's theory is its emphasis upon rationality. Some studies support Mezirow. Others conclude that Mezirow grants rational critical reflection too much importance.[13]

[edit] Boyd and Myers

A view of transformative learning as an intuitive and emotional process is beginning to emerge in the literature.[14] This view of transformative learning is based primarily on the work of Robert Boyd,[15] who has developed a theory of transformative education based on analytical (or depth) psychology.

For Boyd, transformation is a "fundamental change in one's personality involving [together] the resolution of a personal dilemma and the expansion of consciousness resulting in greater personality integration."[16] This calls upon extrarational sources such as symbols, images, and archetypes to assist in creating a personal vision or meaning of what it means to be human.[17]

First, an individual must be receptive or open to receiving "alternative expressions of meaning," and then recognize that the message is authentic.[18] Grieving, considered by Boyd to be the most critical phase of the discernment process, takes place when an individual realizes that old patterns or ways of perceiving are no longer relevant, moves to adopt or establish new ways, and finally, integrates old and new patterns.

Unlike Mezirow, who sees the ego as playing a central role in the process of perspective transformation, Boyd and Myers use a framework that moves beyond the ego and the emphasis on reason and logic to a definition of transformative learning that is more psychosocial in nature.[19]

[edit] O'Sullivan

Perhaps one of the best definitions of transformative learning was put forward by O'Sullivan:[20]

“ Transformative learning involves experiencing a deep, structural shift in the basic premises of thought, feelings, and actions. It is a shift of consciousness that dramatically and irreversibly alters our way of being in the world. Such a shift involves our understanding of ourselves and our self-locations; our relationships with other humans and with the natural world; our understanding of relations of power in interlocking structures of class, race and gender; our body awarenesses, our visions of alternative approaches to living; and our sense of possibilities for social justice and peace and personal joy. ”

[edit] King's Transformative Learning Opportunities Model

Positing that understanding transformative learning may have been hindered by perspectives of rational thought and Western traditions, King[20][21] provides an alternate model grounded in a meta-analysis of research, the Transformative Learning Opportunities Model. This model affirms O'Sullivan's perspective that rather than being confined to what we see from our own perspectives, the field and academy need to look beyond the traditional realm to better understand how adults cope with the processes of inner and outward conflict, dialogue, change, and reintegration in the many variations not yet understood.

[edit] An elusive concept

Transformative learning is an elusive concept. One of the difficulties in defining transformative learning is that it bleeds into the boundaries of concepts such as "meaning making" or "critical thinking".

The term "meaning making" (i.e., constructing meaning) is found most frequently in constructivist approaches to education, based on the work of educators such as John Dewey, Maria Montessori, Jean Piaget, Jerome Bruner, and Lev Vygotsky. In the constructivist view, meaning is constructed from knowledge.

Mezirow[22] posits that all learning is change but not all change is transformation. There is a difference between transmissional, transactional and transformational education.[23] In the first, knowledge is transmitted from teacher to student. In transactional education, it is recognized that the student has valuable experiences, and learns best through experience, inquiry, critical thinking and interaction with other learners. It could be argued that some of the research regarding transformative learning has been in the realm of transactional education, and that what is seen as transformative by some authors[24] is in fact still within the realm of transactional learning.

[edit] Transformative learning in practice

On the surface, the two views of transformative learning presented here are contradictory. One advocates a rational approach that depends primarily on critical reflection whereas the other relies more on intuition and emotion. The differences in the two views, however, may best be seen as a matter of emphasis. Both use rational processes and incorporate imagination as a part of a creative process.

The two different views of transformative learning described here as well as examples of how it occurs in practice[25] suggest that no single model of transformative learning exists.

When transformative learning is the goal of adult education, fostering a learning environment in which it can occur should consider the following:

  • The role of the teacher. The teacher's role in establishing an environment that builds trust and care and facilitates the development of sensitive relationships among learners is a fundamental principle of fostering transformative learning.[26] The goal is to create a community of individuals who are "united in a shared experience of trying to make meaning of their life experience".[27] The teacher also serves as a role model by himself demonstrating a willingness to learn and change.[28]
  • The role of the learner. Although it is difficult for transformative learning to occur without the teacher playing a key role, participants also have a responsibility for creating the learning environment.
  • The role of the rational and the affective. Transformative learning has two layers that at times seem to be in conflict: the cognitive, rational, and objective and the intuitive, imaginative, and subjective.[29] Both the rational and the affective play a role in transformative learning. Although the emphasis has been on transformative learning as a rational process, teachers need to consider how they can help students use feelings and emotions both in critical reflection and as a means of reflection.[30]

[edit] References

  • Boyd, Robert D., and Myers, J. Gordon. "Transformative Education." INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFELONG EDUCATION 7, no. 4 (October-December 1988): 261-284.
  • Burbules, N.C. and Berk, R. (1999) Critical Thinking and Critical Pedagogy: Relations, Differences, and Limits. In Thomas S. Popkewitz and Lynn Fendler, eds.: Critical Theories in Education. New York: Routledge. Available at http://faculty.ed.uiuc.edu/burbules/ncb/papers/critical.html
  • Cragg, C.E., Plotnikoff, R.C., Hugo, K. & Casey, A. (2001) Perspective transformation in RN-to-BSN distance education. Journal of nursing education, 40(7)
  • Cranton, Patricia. UNDERSTANDING AND PROMOTING TRANSFORMATIVE LEARNING: A GUIDE FOR EDUCATORS OF ADULTS. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1994.
  • Cranton, Patricia, ed. TRANSFORMATIVE LEARNING IN ACTION: INSIGHTS FROM PRACTICE. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR ADULT AND CONTINUING EDUCATION NO. 74. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, Summer 1997.
  • Gagnon, Jr., G.W. & Collay, M. (1999) Constructivist Learning Design. Available at http://www.prainbow.com/cld/cldp.html
  • Grabov, Valerie. "The Many Facets of Transformative Learning Theory and Practice." In TRANSFORMATIVE LEARNING IN ACTION: INSIGHTS FROM PRACTICE. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR ADULT AND CONTINUING EDUCATION NO. 74, edited by P. Cranton, pp. 89-96. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, Summer 1997.
  • King, Kathleen P. (2005). Bringing transformative learning to life. Malabar, FL: Krieger.
  • Lee, M. (1999) The Role of Cultural Values in the Interpretation of Significant Life Experiences. Conference Proceedings, Adult Education Research Conference (AERC)
  • Loughlin, Kathleen A. WOMEN'S PERCEPTIONS OF TRANSFORMATIVE LEARNING EXPERIENCES WITHIN CONSCIOUSNESS-RAISING. San Francisco, CA: Mellen Research University Press, 1993.
  • Mezirow, J. (1975). EDUCATION FOR PERSPECTIVE TRANSFORMATION: WOMEN'S REENTRY PROGRAMS IN COMMUNITY COLLEGES. New York: Center for Adult Education Teachers College, Columbia University.
  • Mezirow, J. (1978). Perspective Transformation. ADULT EDUCATION, 100-110.
  • Mezirow, J. (1981). A Critical Theory of Adult Learning and Education. ADULT EDUCATION 32 (1981): 3-23.
  • Mezirow, J. (1991). TRANSFORMATIVE DIMENSIONS OF ADULT LEARNING. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
  • Mezirow, J. (1995). "Transformation Theory of Adult Learning." In IN DEFENSE OF THE LIFEWORLD, edited by M. R. Welton, pp. 39-70. New York: SUNY Press.
  • Mezirow, J. (1997). Transformative Learning: Theory to Practice. In TRANSFORMATIVE LEARNING IN ACTION: INSIGHTS FROM PRACTICE. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR ADULT AND CONTINUING EDUCATION NO. 74, edited by P. Cranton, pp. 5-12. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
  • Mezirow, J. (2000). LEARNING AS TRANSFORMATION: CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON A THEORY IN PROGRESS. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
  • Miller, J.P. & Seller, W. (1990) Curriculum: perspectives and practice. Toronto: Copp Clark Pitman
  • O'Sullivan, E. (2003) Bringing a perspective of transformative learning to globalized consumption. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 27 (4), 326–330
  • Scott, Sue M. "The Grieving Soul in the Transformation Process." In TRANSFORMATIVE LEARNING IN ACTION: INSIGHTS FROM PRACTICE. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR ADULT AND CONTINUING EDUCATION NO. 74, edited by P. Cranton, pp. 41-50. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, Summer 1997.
  • Taylor, Edward W. THE THEORY AND PRACTICE OF TRANSFORMATIVE LEARNING: A CRITICAL REVIEW. INFORMATION SERIES NO. 374. Columbus: ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education, Center on Education and Training for Employment, College of Education, the Ohio State University, 1998.
  • Torosyan, Roben. (2007). Teaching for Transformation: Integrative Learning, Consciousness Development and Critical Reflection. Unpublished manuscript. http://www.faculty.fairfield.edu/rtorosyan/

[edit] Notes

  1. ^ Jack Mezirow (2000)
  2. ^ (Mezirow, 1975 & 1978)
  3. ^ (Cranton, 1994, p. 22)
  4. ^ (Mezirow 1991, p. 167)
  5. ^ (Taylor, 1998)
  6. ^ (Mezirow, 1995, p. 50)
  7. ^ Torosyan (2007, p. 13)
  8. ^ (Taylor, 1998)
  9. ^ Mezirow (1995, adapted from p. 50)
  10. ^ Mezirow (1997)
  11. ^ (Grabov 1997, pp. 90-91)
  12. ^ See Cranton (1994) and Taylor (1998) for a full discussion of these critiques.
  13. ^ (Taylor, 1998, pp. 33-34)
  14. ^ (Grabov 1997, p. 90)
  15. ^ (Boyd & Myers, 1988)
  16. ^ Boyd, 1989, p. 459, cited in Taylor 1998, p. 13)
  17. ^ Boyd & Myers (1988); Cranton (1994)
  18. ^ Boyd & Myers (1988), p. 277
  19. ^ (Taylor, 1998)
  20. ^ a b O'Sullivan (2003)
  21. ^ King (2005)
  22. ^ Mezirow (1990)
  23. ^ (Miller & Seller, 1990)
  24. ^ (e.g. Cragg et al., 2001)
  25. ^ (see Cranton, 1997 & Taylor, 1998)
  26. ^ (Taylor, 1998)
  27. ^ Loughlin (1993), (pp. 320-321)
  28. ^ (Cranton, 1994)
  29. ^ (Grabov, 1997)
  30. ^ (Taylor, 1998)

[edit] External links